• SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Huh? I don’t think you understand my comment. Except for the last line, you’re just further agreeing with me and I’m already agreeing with you.

          • StupidBrotherInLaw@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Telling someone who says government access will be used to spy on citizens but will be useless for combating serious crime that they want telescreens, a fictitious device used for government spying, doesn’t make any sense. Either you don’t know what a telescreen is, you have poor reading comprehension, or you’re a fairly clever troll. Maybe some of all the above.

            • Steve Dice@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              I’m telling someone who says that a want for uncompromising privacy is a US thing that it’s not, and that these compromises they speak of would be akin to telescreens if applied to a non-digital situation.

              • StupidBrotherInLaw@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 months ago

                I’m telling someone who says that a want for uncompromising privacy is a US thing that it’s not

                But their comment doesn’t say or suggest that.

                and that these compromises they speak of would be akin to telescreens if applied to a non-digital situation.

                And they don’t say anything about the compromises except that they’d be used for spying on citizenry.

                This isn’t my fight, I saw you were confused and thought I’d help. My mistake, you really are one of those double down or die types.